posted
Her letter would get an F from a high school English teacher, or it was intended to be a threat.
Paragraph 1: Point: the government has zero tolerance for misinformation.
Paragraph 2: Point: Huge list of mandated new coverages.
Paragraph 3: Point: Government experts say paragraph 2 won't raise costs.
Paragraph 4: Point: Recipe for cooked books. Obesity will end in October of 2010.
Paragraph 5: Point: Don't disagree with the government's assessment.
Paragraph 6: Point: The federal government has given 46 states money. Having accepted our money, "later this fall" we will make "regulations" (not law) that they do what the fed wants.....be our jackbooted thugs against the insurance industry.
In 2014, we'll put you out of business unless you shut up and don't raise your rates.
Paragraph 7: Point: Conclusion. American's want more coverage for less money. We promised it to them and we have an election coming up. The Democrat party can't have the healthcare bill backfire by having increased coverage actually increase costs.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Good, eff em, they gonna lie they should get slapped around.
IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh pointed out a discrepancy in my links (missing). I went back and saw I put the same link in twice and was missing one. Instead of editing it, I accidentally quoted my initial post. I went back to remove that post and removed the entire topic....series of mistakes.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm lost. What's the reference for the claim that this guy is "banned from America forever," other than the seventeen-year-old himself, the one who was so drunk he admits he doesn't even remember what he wrote?
From the police officer's statement, the youth's characterization of his own email was markedly off kilter. What's the check on this not being true for his extreme claim, either?
---
Edited to add: Ah just cannot see taking information from this fella without a verrah large chunk o' salt.
Posts: 831 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Ah just cannot see taking information from this fella without a verrah large chunk o' salt.
It's a claim made against the Obama administration, and Malanthrop is the one making it. Chances of this being much substantiated are minimal. Chances of malanthrop manning up and admitting, "Hey, I was wrong about this," when that happens are even less. Chances of malanthrop posting as though this bit of posting never, ever happened are extremely high.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Mal, if you're going to progress to making threads on a political subject of your interest, please make them have a coherent concept.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The UK kid link was a sarcastic joke related to the real intent of the post.
This administration "keeps score"...even for teenagers that say nasty things about the president.
Anyone actually read Sebelius' letter to AHIS?
This administration has threatened them with regulation and black ball from insurance markets if they don't stop blaming increasing insurance costs on the healthcare bill.
Can the government regulate information,...even misinformation? Of course the companies have free speech rights. They aren't being threatened with criminal prosecution. They aren't violating law but Vinnie with the baseball bat is reminding them, "later this fall" we will make "regulations" and we've already paid off the states. If you know what's best for you, you'll shut up or in 2014, you'll find yourself out of business.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:This administration "keeps score"...even for teenagers that say nasty things about the president.
Time to gauge just how nutty your particular wing is, malanthrop: do you really think, if this story bears any resemblance to reality, that all this British teenager did was call President Obama a 'prick'? Really?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
As I said,,,the Brit kid was a joke...just the atmosphere of administration. I wouldn't be surprised if our insecure, micromanager and chief did get involved in the Brit kid. To get blackballed for life, I would suspect he used the "N" word.
Obama made international comments about and sent the FBI to a backwoods, redneck led, 25 member hick church and had a beer summit over Gates. Is there anything beneath him?
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
I guess I'm the only one who is disturbed that the Executive branch has announced "zero tolerance for misinformation" as defined by their own experts analysis and will punish a business that disagrees with them.
Lord knows, government cost projections are historically more accurate than private industry.
It won't be long and they'll have zero tolerance for misinformation from the media or be threatened with their FCC licenses. Think it's too far off?
posted
No need to be banned, I'm fairly close to moving on..on my own.
"First, they came for the Jews. But I was not a Jew, so I did not speak up. Then they came for the communists. But I was not a communist, so I did not speak up. Then they came for the trade unionists. But I was not a trade unionist, so I did not speak up. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me."
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: As I said,,,the Brit kid was a joke...just the atmosphere of administration. I wouldn't be surprised if our insecure, micromanager and chief did get involved in the Brit kid. To get blackballed for life, I would suspect he used the "N" word.
So here you dismiss it as a joke, and then promptly go on describing it in terms of not being a joke but rather being representative of the president in your estimation. Which is it.
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: No need to be banned, I'm fairly close to moving on..on my own.
"First, they came for the Jews. But I was not a Jew, so I did not speak up. Then they came for the communists. But I was not a communist, so I did not speak up. Then they came for the trade unionists. But I was not a trade unionist, so I did not speak up. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me."
First they came for my Jamaican neighbors, but I was just a repressed white male who gets passed up on jobs constantly in favor of unfairly privileged minorities, so I did not speak up.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: No need to be banned, I'm fairly close to moving on..on my own.
That's unfortunate. The biggest problem I've seen is your posts read a lot like you are standing on soap box, rather than trying to have fun conversing with people.
That's a fixable problem, one that most likely won't go away by you simply moving to another forum. Maybe you should stray from topics about Obama or the liberal left, and talk about other topics so that people can see more facets of your personality.
Posts: 1194 | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
"First, they came for the Jews. But I was not a Jew, so I did not speak up. Then they came for the communists. But I was not a communist, so I did not speak up. Then they came for the trade unionists. But I was not a trade unionist, so I did not speak up. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me."
Interestingly, I see this paralleled very much in the anti-muslim sentiment so prevalent on the right these days.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
JanitorBlade, I decided awhile ago that I would treat malanthrop with exactly as much respect as he treats those who aren't in his particular choir around here. That is to say, little to none at all. It's technically true that I 'play by that line' with mal, but I frankly don't see much difference at all in playing by that line technically as I do with him, or wily-nily all over the place in spirit with everyone all the time, as malanthrop does. Or rather, I see a world of difference, and in the other direction.
But you've got a job to do, and a more clear violation of rules on one end, and a much murkier one of the spirit of the rules on the other, so I've got no hard feelings.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
"First, they came for the Jews. But I was not a Jew, so I did not speak up. Then they came for the communists. But I was not a communist, so I did not speak up. Then they came for the trade unionists. But I was not a trade unionist, so I did not speak up. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me."
Interestingly, I see this paralleled very much in the anti-muslim sentiment so prevalent on the right these days.
The anti-muslim sentiment in the US isn't purely on the right. Our government stands up for muslims, which is a surprising to me. Normally the government doesn't look too kindly on organizations that profess the overthrow of the government and subjugation of other people.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
If it can be said that Muslims 'profess the overthrow of the government and the subjugation of other people', malanthrop, then it can also be said of Christians in America. In fact, historically, we have more of a problem in the United States with wack-job Christian and far-right conservative nut-jobs than we ever have with Islamic terrorists, though of course their competence has far exceeded that of their Christian comrades.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Normally the government doesn't look too kindly on organizations that profess the overthrow of the government and subjugation of other people.
Wasn't that specifically the intent of many of our Founding Fathers? I not sure you're doing your case any good by spewing out anti-American rhetoric here mal.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: I'm not sure he wants to talk about anything else.
Maybe not, but it helps change the perspective that somebody is singing a one note tune.
Yes, I'm getting bored too. I don't like singing to the choir, that's why I come here and have never once posted on a right wing site.
Maybe I should visit right wing sites. Not to discuss politics, but fishing, hunting, God, and other right wing things.
I'm envious of most of you. Apathy, ignorance, denial or acceptance of what is happening to this nation, might be a better way to live.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Normally the government doesn't look too kindly on organizations that profess the overthrow of the government and subjugation of other people.
Wasn't that specifically the intent of many of our Founding Fathers? I not sure you're doing your case any good by spewing out anti-American rhetoric here mal.
Yes and there's a constant struggle between religious freedom and defense of this nation. We must tolerate religions that push for theocracies, enslave their women and barbarically butcher homosexuals and people who follow other faiths.
This religion does teach to overthrow and subjugate and our government goes beyond tolerance, they place them on par with the rest. Probably above Mormons and Jews. If you're giving Christian sermons about overthrowing the government mixed with supremist talk, the government has a different reaction.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote: This religion does teach to overthrow and subjugate and our government goes beyond tolerance, they place them on par with the rest. Probably above Mormons and Jews. If you're giving Christian sermons about overthrowing the government mixed with supremist talk, the government has a different reaction.
There are Christians who, right now in this nation, make much the same sort of talk. Much more damning, pun intended, from people born and raised in a secular nation that has been free and a representative society for many generations than those that have known only generations of authoritarian repressive tyranny throughout their history. Foreign-supported tyranny, no less, in many cases.
What was it Jesus said about beams and motes, malanthrop? Not that I'd expect you to practice what you preach, of course.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: I'm envious of most of you. Apathy, ignorance, denial or acceptance of what is happening to this nation, might be a better way to live.
Oh, god. You've received conscious, passionate, well-reasoned, and greatly well-written responses to your positions, musings, or assertions of fact here. I've looked at them, and learned some things from some of them. Plenty of effort has gone into respectfully and informatively correcting you — or attempting to enlighten you — at many turns along your illustrious posting history here. To handwave it all away as apathy, ignorance and denial is yet another example of why most people have ended up mocking you for your repetitive, incoherent, incurious, and derisive argumentative folly, and why those who look past this time and time again and still provide you with those aforementioned comprehensive and respectful corrections are saints.
And yet, if they needed any evidence to expect informative gestures to be futile if enacted for your behalf, you helpfully provide it at every turn.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: This religion does teach to overthrow and subjugate and our government goes beyond tolerance, they place them on par with the rest. Probably above Mormons and Jews. If you're giving Christian sermons about overthrowing the government mixed with supremist talk, the government has a different reaction.
There are Christians who, right now in this nation, make much the same sort of talk. Much more damning, pun intended, from people born and raised in a secular nation that has been free and a representative society for many generations than those that have known only generations of authoritarian repressive tyranny throughout their history. Foreign-supported tyranny, no less, in many cases.
What was it Jesus said about beams and motes, malanthrop? Not that I'd expect you to practice what you preach, of course.
Well said. Many American Muslims came here to escape theocracies. I'm a supporter of the right for there to be a ground 0 Mosque. While I find it somewhat insensitive, I agree with their right to purchase property and build it there. I'm intillectually honest. I don't like political correctness. The right is using the PC tactics of the left by attacking the mosque due to "sensitivity" to others.
On the other hand,...how many flags and bibles get burned? The president makes an international address when a hick preacher from a swamp, with a couple dozen members wants to burn Korans.
Anyone remember Piss Christ? I was offended. Remember The Satanic Verses? Who put out death warrants? Bibles and US flags burn every day at the hands of Muslims. How do we react?
If a hick from a swamp burns a Koran?
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: I'm envious of most of you. Apathy, ignorance, denial or acceptance of what is happening to this nation, might be a better way to live.
Oh, god. You've received conscious, passionate, well-reasoned, and greatly well-written responses to your positions, musings, or assertions of fact here. I've looked at them, and learned some things from some of them. Plenty of effort has gone into respectfully and informatively correcting you — or attempting to enlighten you — at many turns along your illustrious posting history here. To handwave it all away as apathy, ignorance and denial is yet another example of why most people have ended up mocking you for your repetitive, incoherent, incurious, and derisive argumentative folly, and why those who look past this time and time again and still provide you with those aforementioned comprehensive and respectful corrections are saints.
And yet, if they needed any evidence to expect informative gestures to be futile if enacted for your behalf, you helpfully provide it at every turn.
I take it you fall into the "acceptance" category.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote: This religion does teach to overthrow and subjugate and our government goes beyond tolerance, they place them on par with the rest. Probably above Mormons and Jews. If you're giving Christian sermons about overthrowing the government mixed with supremist talk, the government has a different reaction.
There are Christians who, right now in this nation, make much the same sort of talk. Much more damning, pun intended, from people born and raised in a secular nation that has been free and a representative society for many generations than those that have known only generations of authoritarian repressive tyranny throughout their history. Foreign-supported tyranny, no less, in many cases.
What was it Jesus said about beams and motes, malanthrop? Not that I'd expect you to practice what you preach, of course.
Well said. Many American Muslims came here to escape theocracies. I'm a supporter of the right for there to be a ground 0 Mosque. While I find it somewhat insensitive, I agree with their right to purchase property and build it there. I'm intillectually honest. I don't like political correctness. The right is using the PC tactics of the left by attacking the mosque due to "sensitivity" to others.
On the other hand,...how many flags and bibles get burned? The president makes an international address when a hick preacher from a swamp, with a couple dozen members wants to burn Korans.
Anyone remember Piss Christ? I was offended. Remember The Satanic Verses? Who put out death warrants? Bibles and US flags burn every day at the hands of Muslims. How do we react?
If a hick from a swamp burns a Koran?
A biased response on my part but: We are Americans, we should be better than that. We as a people are supposed to be enlightened enough to not burn Korans and free enough to stand up and say, that is wrong. When it is someone else doing it, well, that is their choice. But this is my land, these are my fellow citizens and my government. I feel very much in my rights to demand that they act as civilized tolerant people. It is a bit like how I might roll my eyes or even laugh when my friend's daughter does something wrong, but when it is my daughter, there is a response. This is my civilization and I see no reason to allow certain behaviors to be an acceptable part of it.
Posts: 2223 | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Agreed. If only this tolerance were universal, within our country from our own government.
“You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing’s replaced them. And it’s not surprising, then, they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.”....Obama
Yeah, small town religious folk who believe in the Bible, gun rights and enforcing the border can't help themselves...if they had better jobs, their minds would be right. Not a surprising argument from a community organizer that blames crime in the inner city, on the very same thing.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: I'm not sure he wants to talk about anything else.
Maybe not, but it helps change the perspective that somebody is singing a one note tune.
Yes, I'm getting bored too. I don't like singing to the choir, that's why I come here and have never once posted on a right wing site.
Maybe I should visit right wing sites. Not to discuss politics, but fishing, hunting, God, and other right wing things.
I'm envious of most of you. Apathy, ignorance, denial or acceptance of what is happening to this nation, might be a better way to live.
You know left wingers also fish, hunt, talk about God, etc? Who are you besides somebody who dislikes progressiveness, and feels white people are being mistreated because they are in the majority?
Posts: 1194 | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
quote:I take it you fall into the "acceptance" category.
How does telling you that you've got the facts wrong translate to "acceptance?"
Maybe I'm too dim-whited to read through your prolific use of impressive, multi-syllable adjectives to understant the point you concisely stated above.
Your post was impressive...if not intended to impress. Forgive me for not catching the meaning you could easily summarize in one sentence.
It's difficult for me to respond to "your facts are wrong". You failed to state where my facts were wrong. Having done so, I'm left without a response. You can claim victory.
Posts: 1495 | Registered: Mar 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:You failed to state where my facts were wrong.
That's not really relevant to the current discussion, which is a summary of previous interactions. Do you disagree that the general response to your posts has been that your facts, or your interpretation thereof, are incorrect? And if that is the case, isn't it unreasonable to conclude that "acceptance" is the response since acceptance would require an agreement about what, exactly, one was accepting?
Contrast: "The healthcare bill will bankrupt us." "You're right, but I'm OK with that." = Acceptance
vs.
"The healthcare bill will bankrupt us." "No, it won't." = Not acceptance; disagreement.
Posts: 3275 | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:You know left wingers also fish, hunt, talk about God, etc? Who are you besides somebody who dislikes progressiveness, and feels white people are being mistreated because they are in the majority?
JanitorBlade, aside from being frustrated and baffled, I am genuinely curious here: why ought we make some sort of effort to court malanthrop?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:You know left wingers also fish, hunt, talk about God, etc? Who are you besides somebody who dislikes progressiveness, and feels white people are being mistreated because they are in the majority?
JanitorBlade, aside from being frustrated and baffled, I am genuinely curious here: why ought we make some sort of effort to court malanthrop?
You don't have to court malanthrop, you can continue to be rude and dismissive if that is what you think is best, so long as you stay within the TOS. I have my way of speaking to people, and it suits me just fine.
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: No need to be banned, I'm fairly close to moving on..on my own.
"First, they came for the Jews. But I was not a Jew, so I did not speak up. Then they came for the communists. But I was not a communist, so I did not speak up. Then they came for the trade unionists. But I was not a trade unionist, so I did not speak up. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me."
Judging by the list of persecutees here, the "they" in question here are Republicans/Right-wingers.
Incidentally, Rushdie was targeted by Ayatollah Khomeini, and I believe Hezbollah. Protests against him by some larger populations in the Middle East were colorful, but not violent. In other words, I wouldn't call Khomeini a poster child for an average Muslim, but rather a poster child for extremists.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:You don't have to court malanthrop, you can continue to be rude and dismissive if that is what you think is best, so long as you stay within the TOS. I have my way of speaking to people, and it suits me just fine.
I don't think it's 'best', honestly. But I still don't understand behaving towards malanthrop as though he were any other poster, either.
On a related topic, I suppose it would be too much to hope for the ToS to be modified such that constant, spirit-of-the-terms violations such as malanthrops style would be considered out of bounds as well.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Rakeesh: My behavior towards posters isn't uniform, but I am polite towards every poster. Do you understand the difference? You can rail, criticize, censure, and still remain polite.
If you can conceptualize the idea that you would like added to the ToS I would be happy to see that the necessary parties see it.
Posts: 1194 | Registered: Jun 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
You already did so very effectively when you addressed behaving as though no one else had spoken or rebutted or even addressed ideas when talking to malanthrop a few days ago. That's the sort of thing I'm talking about, more than anything. I don't have much faith that it would be implemented, though, because truthfully the necessary parties seem (and I can imagine many understandable reasons for this) to have adopted a very hands-off approach to moderation.
As for the difference, well, I do understand it. A personal, philosophical difference to me, I guess. I've never placed much value in the difference between expressing scorn and contempt 'politely' and doing so more directly, though I respect that others do so.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by malanthrop: I take it you fall into the "acceptance" category.
... Here's the second kicker. Your responses, tragically, constantly reinforce people's presumed need to speak down to you to the extent that it can not possibly be construed as non-patronizing. Whenever you get a response that is markedly above your comprehension level, your response is mystifying, and people don't get far outside of simple questions.
Right now, for instance, I actually do regret that I did not respond to you using much simpler language and avoiding complex or compound ideas, because I should have known you would not have been able to parse or respond to it coherently. No joke.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
